jfk taken out by mob??? **Contains Graphic Images**

fergus o brien

Dragonblaster wrote: »

He also seemed to go out of his way to annoy Fritz and the other police with his arrogance and unhelpfulness, whereas I would have imagined a bit of humility, "Please, guys, help me; you've got the wrong man, I've been set up and I don't know why" might have been more helpful to his cause.

Unless all the police were in on it too. Trouble is, if it was a CIA plot, police dislike the CIA intensely, and there is internecine rivalry between FBI and CIA, even though their manors don't theoretically overlap.

well we only have fritz word (for what its worth ) and his notes to tell us what oswald said or his demeanor during the interrogation ,but its reasonable to say oswald may have been a tad annoyed because he was an innocent man who has been arrested and beat up by police and branded a murderer before the world .
oswald in his interviews said "i didnt kill anyone" ,"all i know is i have been charged with murdering a police man i know nothng more than that" , and in fritz notes he said he didnt shoot anyone he was in the lunch room . i dont know about humility (after all ive never found my self in his situation and neither have you guys) but he said at every opportunity that he didnt do it and he asked for help .

"Unless all the police were in on it too. Trouble is, if it was a CIA plot, police dislike the CIA intensely, and there is internecine rivalry between FBI and CIA, even though their manors don't theoretically overlap"

here we go again with the cast of thousands .

fergus o brien

Monty Burnz wrote: »

So was he a...what's the PC term...a nutjob? I don't see how he thought he would get away once he shot the police officer, and he didn't seem to have any great ideas as to how to escape the Book Depository either (and indeed he didn't).

Look at it this way: myself and a friend once devised a plan to rob a Dunnes Stores where we worked*. We would have made probably less than 20k. We would not have been able to avoid suspicion, but the police would not have know who out of a group of say 6 to 8 people was actually responsible. Now, I'm not a thief, but even if I was I still didn't like those odds, having to face down the Guards in an interview. How many folks were in the Book Depository where Oswald left his rifle? So he would have known that he would have been one of the main suspects, regardless of anything else.

Ok, so he knows he's going to be at least questioned as one of the people in the building where the shooting happened - he's going to need a great story/alibi, or he's got to get out of the United States. Where's his escape plan? It takes him to a cinema in the city?

So he was either a total nutjob or the story is more complicated that it seems.

*just to clarify, this was purely an intellectual exercise to relieve us of the monotonous tedium of the grocery department (me) and drapery (him)

there is warren commission testimony and sworn affidavits that show the time of tippits killing was just a little after 1.00pm and not 1.16pm oswald was seen standing at the bus stop outside his rooming house untill atleast 1.04 pm which makes it impossible for him to have been tippits killer. LNers call oswald a nut with dangerous psychotic tendancies (based on what ?) ,fletcher prouty has also been called a nut by LNers and the thing is both worked for the us government ,you would think they would check out potential staff a bit better wouldnt you.

fergus o brien

Monty Burnz wrote: »

For sure. So he was either nuts and did it, or...(and this is where the CT comes in).

An alternative explanation for his behaviour was that he was really pissed off at being left in the lurch once he was caught, realising that he was being hung out to dry (presumably he was supposed to be spirited away or protected somehow). I know I'd be a tad...annoyed, and possibly be quite rude towards the police (rude up to the point of shooting them? )

I often wonder what modern forensics and psychology would have made of the whole thing. Probably would have eliminated a lot of the doubts that exist today.

as i said to dragonblaster instead of opinions or assumptions why not post the evidence you believe backs up your beliefs.

Dragonblaster

fergus o brien wrote: »

well we only have fritz word (for what its worth )

What reason is there to suppose that Fritz was lying (thus bringing in another layer of the privileged conspirators or co-travellers)?

fergus o brien wrote: »

its reasonable to say oswald may have been a tad annoyed because he was an innocent man who has been arrested and beat up by police and branded a murderer before the world .

As you say, none of us has faced this, but I'm pretty sure if I were nabbed out of the blue by armed police having done nothing wrong, my instinct wouldn't be to punch one (which Oswald admitted, accepting that he understood why one had given him a black eye), and I certainly wouldn't be shouting the odds at a bunch of pissed-off cops in an age of pretty much legalised police brutality.

I don't think I'm pushing a fantasy too far to say I'm pretty sure I'd be confused and absolutely p*ssing myself, not wanting to give the guys any reason not to see me as a reasonable guy.

As for the lunchroom story, the fact is that Oswald had been alone on the floor where the supposed plant happened. I'd be interested to know how the "framing party" did their work without him noticing.

fergus o brien wrote: »

"Unless all the police were in on it too. Trouble is, if it was a CIA plot, police dislike the CIA intensely, and there is internecine rivalry between FBI and CIA, even though their manors don't theoretically overlap"

here we go again with the cast of thousands .

Well, you've just added Captain Fritz and presumably his junior officers to the throng. The more one looks into the CT, the more people one has to include.

Or was Fritz just lying for fun? If he was one of the many Dallas Kennedy-haters, (and allowed his prejudices to overwhelm his professional ethics) why would he want to fit up a man he knew to be totally innocent - or even the guy who had? And if he loved Kennedy, wouldn't he want to nail the guy who'd actually done it?

You've also said that Oswald didn't kill Tippit. So someone else did, unless the real assassins volunteered for that one too. Murdered a cop at random, just so they could say Oswald did it - as if just killing Kennedy wasn't enough somehow.

Then there were the witnesses who said Oswald did it, and the bullets must have been switched.

It really does start to mushroom once one accepts a conspiracy to frame and kill a totally innocent man. OK, "thousands" was a throwaway word, and I've acknowledged that.

But something as elaborate as this, ensuring that the innocent party was always in the right place at the right time, and all his history was changed retrospectively to implicate him, and taking the risk of killing another person at a place Oswald happened to be at and then switch the bullets to match the gun, or retro-fake the pistol receipt to match a fake identity to fit the innocent man...

Can you at least admit at least that this is not just three or four people in a room sworn to eternal secrecy?

Monty Burnz

fergus o brien wrote: »

as i said to dragonblaster instead of opinions or assumptions why not post the evidence you believe backs up your beliefs.

Evidence of his state of mind? And what do you know about my beliefs?

fergus o brien

Dragonblaster wrote: »

What reason is there to suppose that Fritz was lying (thus bringing in another layer of the privileged conspirators or co-travellers)?



As you say, none of us has faced this, but I'm pretty sure if I were nabbed out of the blue by armed police having done nothing wrong, my instinct wouldn't be to punch one (which Oswald admitted, accepting that he understood why one had given him a black eye), and I certainly wouldn't be shouting the odds at a bunch of pissed-off cops in an age of pretty much legalised police brutality.

I don't think I'm pushing a fantasy too far to say I'm pretty sure I'd be confused and absolutely p*ssing myself, not wanting to give the guys any reason not to see me as a reasonable guy.

As for the lunchroom story, the fact is that Oswald had been alone on the floor where the supposed plant happened. I'd be interested to know how the "framing party" did their work without him noticing.



Well, you've just added Captain Fritz and presumably his junior officers to the throng. The more one looks into the CT, the more people one has to include.

Or was Fritz just lying for fun? If he was one of the many Dallas Kennedy-haters, (and allowed his prejudices to overwhelm his professional ethics) why would he want to fit up a man he knew to be totally innocent - or even the guy who had? And if he loved Kennedy, wouldn't he want to nail the guy who'd actually done it?

You've also said that Oswald didn't kill Tippit. So someone else did, unless the real assassins volunteered for that one too. Murdered a cop at random, just so they could say Oswald did it - as if just killing Kennedy wasn't enough somehow.

Then there were the witnesses who said Oswald did it, and the bullets must have been switched.

It really does start to mushroom once one accepts a conspiracy to frame and kill a totally innocent man. OK, "thousands" was a throwaway word, and I've acknowledged that.

But something as elaborate as this, ensuring that the innocent party was always in the right place at the right time, and all his history was changed retrospectively to implicate him, and taking the risk of killing another person at a place Oswald happened to be at and then switch the bullets to match the gun, or retro-fake the pistol receipt to match a fake identity to fit the innocent man...

Can you at least admit at least that this is not just three or four people in a room sworn to eternal secrecy?

fritz denied ever making notes while oswald was being interogated and low and behold years later what turns up (fritz notes ) roger craig said he saw oswald on the day of the assassination (i believe in fritz office) he went there to see if the man who had been arrested (oswald ) could be the man he saw run down the knoll and get into a rambler on elm street .
fritz denied that roger craig was ever any where near oswald ,the truth was put to the lie by of all people jessy curry who published a photo in his book which shows roger craig in fritz outer office feet away from where oswald was.
im not saying fritz was a part of a conspiracy to kill jfk (of course he wasnt ) but he was a party to the cover up ,and thats what i have been saying all along ,you say all these people must have been a part of this vast conspiracy (what your missing is that the conspiracy to kill jfk and the cover up are two different things ) fritz picked up the shell casings found in the snpers nest with his bare hands and put them in his pocket (he was seen by tom alyea) im not aware of any document that says he did this and im sure your aware of a thing called the chain of evidence.

again i dont care to speculate on who shot jfk or tippit but i will discuss the evidence if thats what you want to do .

fergus o brien

Monty Burnz wrote: »

Evidence of his state of mind? And what do you know about my beliefs?

sorry mate i think your taking me up wrong here ,i was discussing the case with dragonblaster in earlier posts and i said rather than us speculating on what did or didnt happen maybe he could post say 20 reasons why he believes oswald is guilty and to add the evidence which he believes shows oswald to be guilty . i didnt think that was unreasonable and thats what i was saying to you .

Monty Burnz

fergus o brien wrote: »

sorry mate i think your taking me up wrong here ,i was discussing the case with dragonblaster in earlier posts and i said rather than us speculating on what did or didnt happen maybe he could post say 20 reasons why he believes oswald is guilty and to add the evidence which he believes shows oswald to be guilty . i didnt think that was unreasonable and thats what i was saying to you .

Fair enough

This is one of the CTs where I think there are some unanswered questions and I'm not convinced by either side of the debate yet. The problem for me is that I know for a fact that a lot of the CT evidence as portrayed in for example Oliver Stone's film has been debunked - it's hard to know which of the discrepencies are real and which are misunderstandings or fabrications. If you don't have facts in front of you that you can trust, it's hard to make a guess even based on the balance of probabilities.

fergus o brien

i would agree with you that the movie jfk is not 100% accurate ,but that is because parts of it are dramatised as with any movie and oliver stone has said so many times .i am aware that certain sites online portray the movie as fiction allmost in its entirety which is untrue ,to fabricate means to distort the truth oliver stone has never done that but he did dramatise certain parts as is the case with any movie based on true events. i do however have to say that jfk is largely accurate and not debunked .

i agree also that it can be hard for some people to figure out what bits are dramatised ,by the same token if a person goes online and types jfk assassination into google they will see an awfull lot of sites quite a few which are openly biased . two of the first sites nearly always seen on the top of a jfk search list are wikipedia and mcadams both of which are known for being biased . so a person just starting out in the jfl world first finds them selves most likely on either or both of those forums , i have posted some articles in this thread about those two sites as well as others.

an other site which claims to have debunked all theories and proved that oswald is guilty is dave von piens site which is rife with inaccuracies and distortions from gerald posner . posner in his book case closed says oswald was working on the sixth floor untill 11.55 at which time his co workers and his supervisor bill shelly went down in the elevator to the first floor for lunch and that oswald then assembled the snipers nest and rifle and hid in the snipers nest untill jfk arrived at 12.30. now this is the true meaning of the word fabrication because he doesnt say that oswald was working up on the sixth floor with 5 or people (so couldnt assemble the rifle or snipers nest ) he doesnt say that oswald asked his co workers to send the elevator back up ,he doesnt say that bill shelly (oswalds supervisor ) saw oswald on the first floor about 11.55 (so oswald did not stay on the sixth floor) he doesnt say a man called eddie piper saw and spoke to oswald about midday on the first floor ,he doesnt say a lady called carolyn arnold saw oswald sitting in the second floor lunchroom at 12.15 (where he said he went ) and he doesnt say she also claimed to have seen him a short time before the assassination (through the double front doors) standing near the telephone. now why would a researcher/author omit all that information ? its not through error these guys are top researchers that appear on tv programs .the testimony of mr shelly /eddie piper and oswalds co workers can be read by anyone in the warren commision vollumes online for free and can see that what i said above is accurate ,carolyn arnold was never called to the warren commission (probably for obvious reasons) so you cant read her testimony .

Brown Bomber

fergus o brien wrote: »

google they will see an awfull lot of sites quite a few which are openly biased

You should try http://blekko.com/

Out of interest Fergus has all your research led to any theories behind the motive for the killing?

fergus o brien

i tend to try and stick with the evidence thats there such as witness testimony ,statments and sworn affidavits as well as physical evidence ,some thing that i have never really liked are theories .

but yes i believe there were strong motives to kill jfk , the bay of pigs /jfk was actively pulling out of vietnam / he was pulling away from the federal reserve and printing his own money/civil rights issues . jfk was still warm in his grave when lbj reversed his decisions to pull out of vietnam and the federal reserve system ,you can see why jfk was going to dump him for the forth coming election .

fishder

Very interesting topic the way I see things nothing would suprise me about JFK death, I think I read some where that his father was a bag man for the irish mob way back. But when you look at all the shootings off past presidents in the states there are an alot off nuts with guns over there.

jpm4

fishder wrote: »

Very interesting topic the way I see things nothing would suprise me about JFK death, I think I read some where that his father was a bag man for the irish mob way back. But when you look at all the shootings off past presidents in the states there are an alot off nuts with guns over there.

Bingo. Where's the Ronald Reagan shooting conspiracy thread? Not worth it because he survived or was a nasty Republican? I find that kind of thing quite interesting.

Monty Burnz

jpm4 wrote: »

Bingo. Where's the Ronald Reagan shooting conspiracy thread? Not worth it because he survived or was a nasty Republican? I find that kind of thing quite interesting.

It's a valid point, but I don't know if there is evidence that Oswald was actually was deranged (aside from the fact that he seems to have killed the POTUSA).

fergus o brien

there is no evidence that oswald was deranged because he wasnt but he was a troubled teen and was dislexic ,there are many troubled teens in the world now (and since the assasination) just like oswald was and they arent considered potential assassins . heres a piece from an interesting site

"The two elder brothers, John and Robert, found work and in 1952 Marguerite and Lee moved to　New York."
In fact, the two elder brothers both went into military service upon leaving home. Why is this called ‘found work’? They were serving their country. What we find next is equally negligent in quality of content and in truthfulness:
"Although considered an intelligent boy, Lee Harvey Oswald's behaviour at school deteriorated. He was sent to a detention centre and underwent psychiatric treatment."
The bias at this point in the Spartacus biography is blatantly obvious:
1) Lee Oswald’s behavior at school was not why he was sent to a detention center.
2) Lee Oswald was sent to a detention center for missing too much school. He spent his time at home, traveling on buses and subways, and going to the zoo and to the library instead of to school. He was therefore sent to the detention center.
3) Lee Oswald did not undergo any psychiatric treatment at the detention center. He was given several interviews at the detention center by a psychiatrist to assess his problems as a juvenile who had been a chronic truant.
It was determined that he was emotionally starved, and had been neglected by his mother.
When carefully examined, the testimony of Dr. Renaus Hartogs, who interviewed Lee, as given to the Warren Commission, turned out to not match his statements on record. Yet "Official Versions" continue to cite Hartogs. Hartogs told the Warren Commission he was convinced of Lee Oswald’s belligerent attitude and pronounced him dangerous, but even the Warren Commission decided not to use Hartog’s testimony:
"Posner cited the testimony of Renatus Hartogs, the psychiatrist who examined Oswald as a teenage truant, arguing that Hartog's findings suggested a violent potential. (6) The Warren Commission dismissed Hartog's testimony when an examination of his original report revealed the opposite conclusion. In
fact, the commission concluded, "[c]ontrary to reports that appeared after the assassination, the psychiatric examination did not indicate that Lee Oswald was a potential assassin,potentially
dangerous, that his 'outlook on life had strongly paranoid overtones,' or that he should be institutionalized."


here is a link to the site which contained the above.
http://www.lee-harvey-oswald.com/biasinthemedia.html
the attempt on general walkers life was used as a further attempt to try and show to the world that oswald had been violent prior to the assassination of jfk .it is said oswald used the same carcano he would later fire at jfk to try and kill walker ,however there are a few obvious problems with this,
1/ a witness walter kirk coleman saw 2 men (there goes the lone nut theory)
2/the carcano was 6.5 ,detective ira van cleave said the bullet retieved from walkers house was a 30.06
3/also oswald the man so proficient with the carcano firing from at distance from the 6th floor at a moving target seems to be incapable of hitting walker a sitting target in his house feet away.

When Jesse Curry retired as police chief of Dallas, Texas, he wrote a book called "JFK Assassination File." In a 1969 interview for the Dallas Morning News around the time of publication, Curry stated,

"We don't have any proof that Oswald fired the rifle, and never did.
Nobody's yet been able to put him in that building with a gun in his hand."

Dragonblaster

fergus o brien wrote: »

the carcano was 6.5 ,detective ira van cleave said the bullet retieved from walkers house was a 30.06

But Robert Fraser, an FBI firearms expert said it was a 6.5, and Page 60 of the HSC report says that neutron activation analysis identified the bullet from Walker's house as coming most likely from a Mannlicher-Carcano.

So either Van Cleeve is wrong or Fraser is, not to mention the neutron activation analysis team. People do get things wrong. In any case, the bullet was thoroughly fragmented.

fergus o brien wrote: »

also oswald the man so proficient with the carcano firing from at distance from the 6th floor at a moving target seems to be incapable of hitting walker a sitting target in his house feet away

Kennedy's car was effectively slowly moving up Oswald's sight picture. Much easier to lead than if it's moving from left to right. He was well supported with a windowledge to support the rifle.

In the case of the Walker shooting, Oswald was firing freehand. (I always find that about the worst stance in HFT shooting). A proper freehand stance with the elbow of the lead arm on your hip is difficult to hold steady for long. Your sight picture is changing all the time.

Walker was sitting at his desk, so in all probability Oswald only had sight of the general's head.

I believe the shot was fired from about 100ft, through glass, at a small target, from a freehand stance.

Plenty of "scope" for error even for a competent marksman.

"Nobody's yet been able to put him in that building with a gun in his hand."

Except Howard Brennan. He did finger Oswald initially in the lineup, though he hedged about whether it absolutely was Oswald he saw in the window. He later said that at the time he was worried about a conspiracy(!) and that he feared for his family. He later absolutely identified Oswald as who he saw.

And nobody identified anybody else they said they saw with a rifle either in the TSBD or on the Grassy Knoll.

fergus o brien

heres a good link with lots of info on the walker bullet
http://www.whokilledjfk.net/Walker.htm

there is not one piece of info to link oswald to the attack on walker ,it was purely a fabrication to show to the world that oswald (the man they said shot kennedy ) had violent tendencies and had tried to shoot someone else prior to the assassination of jfk.


MR. EISENBERG -- "Mr. Frazier, did you examine this bullet [Commission
Exhibit 573, a bullet connected with the assassination attempt against
General Edwin Walker in Dallas, Texas, on April 10, 1963] to determine
whether it was or might have been fired in Exhibit 139?"

MR. FRAZIER -- "Yes, I did."

MR. EISENBERG -- "And what was your conclusion?"

MR. FRAZIER -- "I was unable to reach a conclusion as to whether or
not it had been fired from this rifle. The conclusion went slightly
further than that, in that we determined that the general rifling
characteristics of the rifle 139 are of the same type as those found
on the bullet, Exhibit 573, and, further, on this basis, that the
bullet could have been fired from the rifle on the basis of its land
and groove impressions.

"And, second, that all of the remaining physical
characteristics of this bullet, 573, are the same as Western 6.5-
millimeter Mannlicher-Carcano bullets of the type normally loaded in
ammunition made for this rifle, 139. However, the mutilation of the
nose of the bullet has eliminated the length characteristics, and it
cannot be definitely stated that Exhibit 573 is, in fact, a Western
Cartridge Company product, but all of the remaining characteristics of
base shape, distance from the base to the cannelure, the width of the
cannelure, and the overall appearance, coloration, and so forth, are
similar to Western ammunition."

MR. EISENBERG -- "Is this a jacketed bullet?"

MR. FRAZIER -- "Yes, it is a copper-alloy jacketed bullet having a
lead core."

MR. EISENBERG -- "Can you think of any reason why someone might have
called this a steel-jacketed bullet?"

MR. FRAZIER -- "No, sir; except that some individuals commonly refer
to rifle bullets as steel-jacketed bullets, when they actually in fact
just have a copper-alloy jacket." ....

MR. EISENBERG -- "But you do conclude that this was fired from a
Mannlicher-Carcano 91/38, or a rifle with similar barrel
characteristics?"

MR. FRAZIER -- "Yes, sir." ....

MR. McCLOY -- "When you say you were able to determine it was fired
from this type of rifle or one similar to it, that would include a
number of different kinds of rifles besides the Mannlicher-Carcano?"

MR. FRAZIER -- "Yes, sir; it could include a variety of weapons with
which I am not familiar in the foreign field."

MR. McCLOY -- "But it is definitely, according to your best judgment,
a 6.5-millimeter bullet?"
MR. FRAZIER -- "Yes, sir."



"MR. EISENBERG -- "Mr. Frazier, did you examine this bullet [Commission
Exhibit 573, a bullet connected with the assassination attempt against
General Edwin Walker in Dallas, Texas, on April 10, 1963] to determine
whether it was or might have been fired in Exhibit 139?"

MR. FRAZIER -- "Yes, I did."

MR. EISENBERG -- "And what was your conclusion?"
MR. FRAZIER -- "I was unable to reach a conclusion as to whether or
not it had been fired from this rifle."

"

MR. McCLOY -- "But it is definitely, according to your best judgment,
a 6.5-millimeter bullet?"
MR. FRAZIER -- "Yes, sir."

"Walker was sitting at his desk, so in all probability Oswald only had sight of the general's head."
if the shooter was oswald (or otherwise) he would have atleast seen walker from the shoulders up (even sitting down at his desk ) and that was more than enough to kill jfk sat in his limo who was moving at between 5 and 10 miles per hour at a distance of atleast 88 feet away.


Quote:
"Nobody's yet been able to put him in that building with a gun in his hand."
"Nobody's yet been able to put him in that building with a gun in his hand."
"Except Howard Brennan."
november 24 1963
krld tv : chief curry do you have an eyewitness who saw someone shoot the president ?.
dpd chief jessie curry: no sir we do not.

bog master

[QUOTE=Dragonblaster



Except Howard Brennan. He did finger Oswald initially in the lineup, though he hedged about whether it absolutely was Oswald he saw in the window. He later said that at the time he was worried about a conspiracy(!) and that he feared for his family. He later absolutely identified Oswald as who he saw.

And nobody identified anybody else they said they saw with a rifle either in the TSBD or on the Grassy Knoll.

[/QUOTE]

WC testimony: heard only two shots
His Book: writes of 3 shots

WC testimony: the man was standing up when shooting, impossible unless shooting through glass.

WC testimony: could not remember hair colour of man in the window
His Book: dark hair that was beginning to recede

WC testimony: could see 70% to 85% of the rifle and could see all of the barrel, yet did not see a scope on the rifle


Book: has super eyesight and can identify license plates hundreds of yards before others can? HMMMM!


WC testimony: Could not identify Jarman and Norman who were in 5th floor window


WC testimony: no echoes from gunshots
His Book: “It is easy to understand why many thought the shots were coming from the area of the underpass as the buildings and open area combine to produce an “echo” effect.”


A very suspect witness in my opinion!

fergus o brien

we have another thread going on this topic but this thread contains a vast amount of posts /pictures/facts and info so i thought it would be good to revive it ,even if just for people who may be interested to read it .

symboybot

Dragonblaster wrote: »

But Robert Fraser, an FBI firearms expert said it was a 6.5, and Page 60 of the HSC report says that neutron activation analysis identified the bullet from Walker's house as coming most likely from a Mannlicher-Carcano.

So either Van Cleeve is wrong or Fraser is, not to mention the neutron activation analysis team. People do get things wrong. In any case, the bullet was thoroughly fragmented.



Kennedy's car was effectively slowly moving up Oswald's sight picture. Much easier to lead than if it's moving from left to right. He was well supported with a windowledge to support the rifle.

In the case of the Walker shooting, Oswald was firing freehand. (I always find that about the worst stance in HFT shooting). A proper freehand stance with the elbow of the lead arm on your hip is difficult to hold steady for long. Your sight picture is changing all the time.

Walker was sitting at his desk, so in all probability Oswald only had sight of the general's head.

I believe the shot was fired from about 100ft, through glass, at a small target, from a freehand stance.

Plenty of "scope" for error even for a competent marksman.



Except Howard Brennan. He did finger Oswald initially in the lineup, though he hedged about whether it absolutely was Oswald he saw in the window. He later said that at the time he was worried about a conspiracy(!) and that he feared for his family. He later absolutely identified Oswald as who he saw.

And nobody identified anybody else they said they saw with a rifle either in the TSBD or on the Grassy Knoll.

Brennan claimed that Oswald was standing and aiming his rifle - a feat that would have been impossible given that the window was only partially open and that one would have to be kneeling in order to not be shooting through the glass. His testimony is generally discounted as un- convincing.

Tipsy McSwagger

fergus o brien wrote: »

we have another thread going on this topic but this thread contains a vast amount of posts /pictures/facts and info so i thought it would be good to revive it ,even if just for people who may be interested to read it .

Cheers I didn't know it was here.

symboybot

Brown Bomber wrote: »

You should try http://blekko.com/

Out of interest Fergus, has all your research led to any theories behind the motive for the killing?

I'd like to take a crack at this one, at least in terms of providing references that give a really clear picture of the motives. The single most effective book in explaining the motives I believe would be "JFK and the Unspeakable - Why He Died and Why It Matters" by James W. Douglass (pub 2008). This paperback is available on amazon.com or amazon.ca and is reviewed on amazon.com. It is based on a lot of US government documents released under the auspices of the JFK Assassination Record's Act of 1992 which established the Assassination Records Review Board tasked with collecting government agencies' documents related to the assassination, including Military Intelligence, the CIA, the FBI, elements of the Secret Service the various military agencies including the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the Kennedy administration and cabinet offices such as the Secretary of State, etc.

It presents a compelling case for a combination of CIA, Military Intelligence, and mafia hit men (some US, and some French Corsican) run by rightwing elements of the CIA, financed by Texas big oilmen, and aided and abetted in at least the cover-up if not the planning and implementation by the FBI, J. Edgar Hoover, Lyndon Johnson and his allies and underlings.

Evidence is also presented of an aborted previous plot in Chicago to kill JFK three weeks earlier involving an identical set up - a disgruntled former marine (with US intelligence connections) - Thomas Arthur Vallee who had just started working in a building overlooking the Presidential parade route being set up as a patsy, with the real, professional assassins placed in other buildings around the same site with high powered telescopic rifles. That presidential motorcade was cancelled just hours before the hit was scheduled, because of a tip from an FBI informant named "Lee". The information is not reported to the Dallas Secret Service contingent and is then buried for nearly thirty years. In Miami one week before the assassination another presidential motorcade is cancelled because of a tip from a Miami police informant who hears Joseph Adam Milteer a right wing militant, white racist with Klan connections who states (on a surreptitious taped recording) that there's a plot to kill the President "from an office building with a high-powered rifle" that was already "in the working" (on November 10th - which led to precautions being taken during the Presidential visit to Miami on November 18, 1963.

This book also makes a compelling case for an Oswald look-alike on the day of the assassination.

The Oswald double that fled the TSBD in a Rambler station wagon along with a tall black "Cuban" or native Indian, was driven to the site where Officer Tippit was killed by the Oswald double and the other conspirator. Then the Oswald double flees (or is possibly driven) to the Texas Theater where he is spotted entering without paying to draw attention and the police are called. Earlier, the real Oswald (after perhaps finally getting a call in the lunchroom from his handler – where he had previously been instructed to wait for that call, then gets instructions to return to his rooming house, retrieve his pistol and to get a ride in a Dallas police car, #107 which had honked twice for him at his rooming house, (according to Oswald’s landlady). The car had been sold to the public the previous April. The real Oswald is taken to the Texas Theater around 1 or 1:05 pm, where he has been instructed to meet a new contact. He was seen sitting down next to a number of persons sitting by themselves for short periods then moving on to the next hoped-for contact unsuccessfully and is then seen returning to the lobby and buying popcorn at 1:15 pm by the concessions person (at the exact time that Tippit was being murdered), before returning into the theater to again try to locate his unknown contact, again unsuccessfully, since this was just a set up to get him into position to be arrested and hopefully killed in the theater. After the Oswald double arrives and enters the theatre without paying in order to draw attention, the double then goes up and hides in the balcony. When the police arrive they take the real Oswald into custody after a brief scuffle and lead him out the front of the theater (years later another witness in the theater reports that a man sitting at the back of the theater was Jack Ruby). Shortly thereafter the police find the Oswald double and take him out the back of the theater (according to a witness), put him in a police car, drive him a short ways away and release him. At 2:00 pm eight blocks away, the Oswald double is seen sitting in the passenger seat of a car, appearing to be waiting for someone. The witness to this writes down the license plate number on that car which is later traced to a CIA operative on his personal car, although the car the plates are currently on is different from the agent's car. The double is then joined by a second conspirator and they drive to the other side of the river, where around 3:30 pm, an unmarked CIA plane sets down on a flat river bank rough landing strip on the other side of the river from the Texas Theater and an Oswald double and tall dark "Cuban" looking man are seen getting on that plane which takes off and flies to the military/CIA's Roswell Air Force Base in New Mexico (Area 51), which is closed down at that time to facilitate this secret landing.

An accidental witness who was also on that same flight (Air Force Sergeant Robert G. Vinson of the North American Air Defense Command (NORAD) is refused exit from this base until after the security shutdown ends and he is then given directions to the nearest bus route (he had been to Washington D.C. to consult with superiors about not getting an earned promotion and was on standby for the next military air force flight back home to the Denver area, when he was called in and mistakenly directed aboard an unmarked plane where he sat alone until a pilot and co-pilot showed up, came on board without talking to him, went to the cockpit, took off and then flew to Dallas and landed on the riverbank air strip. When the Oswald double and other man came on board they thought Vinson was part of the crew. Within a month strangers began asking questions about him of his neighbors and in November of 1964, the CIA interviewed him and subjected him to extensive testing and additional interrogation and then offered him a job, which he declined. He was then ordered to leave his work at NORAD and work for the CIA and was ordered to sign secrecy oaths about his entire past and future military career. He had recognized the Oswald double as a look alike for the Oswald who had been arrested and killed in police custody and he therefore feared for his life, so he didn't come forward with his story until 30 years later.

In addition to this excellent and insightful book that covers the real motives for JFK's assassination in great detail, there are two other books that extensively document many of the how's and whys of the cover up as well as the motivations and career history of graft and corruption of LBJ.

The latter information is covered and documented in great detail in "LBJ the Mastermind Behind the JFK Assassination" by Phillip F. Nelson (pub 2010). The second is actually a five volume large-format paperback set - "Inside the Assassination Records Review Board" by Douglas P. Horne - Chief Analyst for Military Records (pub 2010). This book takes on all of the disputed evidence in great and well documented detail, including re-interviewing under oath the three military autopsy pathologists who conducted the autopsy, some others under oath and some not under oath including a number of important autopsy witnesses as well as Parkland hospital medical witnesses. It relays a compelling case of document, photo and x-ray forgery. In addition it contains a nearly 200 page analysis and proof of alteration in the Zapruder film. If you really want to understand how the cover up was run and by whom, this set is a must. Both of these works are also available and reviewed on amazon.com.

symboybot

silkworm53 wrote: »

Because the inside of the car was splattered in blood and brain matter and it was a gruesome sight.

The physical evidence however shows that Kennedy was struck by two bullets.

1. In the back of the base of the neck above the level of the shoulder blade and to the right of the spine at the level the C6 vertebra before it exited the base of the trachea below the larynx.



A. Bullet Hole in Back of Suit Collar and Shirt.
B. Bullet Hole in Back.
C. Halo around Bullet Hole.
D. Spine Struck by Bullet.
E. & F. Pleura and Lung Bruised.
G. Air in Tissues.
H. Hole in Trachea.
I. Tracheostomy.
J. Holes in Front of Shirt.
K. Nick in Necktie.



2. The fatal bullet struck Kennedy in the back of the head and exited the top front right side:








It is clear therefore that two fatal shots came from above and behind from the direction of the 6th floor TSBD south east corner window.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dbbIjki-HLo

There was nothing to remain hidden. Oswald did it.

All regurgitated Warren Commission crap! There is now compelling proof of tampering with the X-rays, the photos, the brain, the body, and the Zapruder film. See "Inside the Aassassination Records Review Board" by Dourglas P. Horne - Chief Analyst for Military Records (ARRB) (pub 2010) - a five volume large-format soft back set available and reviewed on amazon.com.

symboybot

silkworm53 wrote: »

1.

That's completely untrue. This is where the issue is addressed in the Warren Report:
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/jfkinfo/wcr4.htm#p2


http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/jfkinfo/wcr4.htm#p2

2.

Wrong again.

This issue is also discussed in the Warren Report:



http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/jfkinfo/wcr4.htm#p26

3.

There are no problems with Marina's story. She admitted she took the photos and she has never changed her story.
The photos that became Warren Commission exhibits were developed from the negatives found in the Paine's garage among Oswald's possessions.
One photo turned up in the possessions of George de Mohrenschildt who had befriended Oswald in the summer of 1962.
Oswald had sent him a print of one of his backyard photos with the words "To my friend George from Lee Oswald" with the date '5/IV/63' and the phrase "“'Hunter of fascists, ha-ha-ha!” written in Russian scrawled on the back. The writing was in Oswald's handwriting.

4.

Mrs. Randle said the packages was about 28 inches long.
The Warren Commission concluded that in any case both Randle and her brother Wesley were mistaken about the length of the package.





http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/jfkinfo/wcr4.htm#p11

Oswald's fingerprints were found on the package, the paper and tape used to create the parcel came from the TSBD and fiber closely matching those from the blanket used by Oswald to store his rifle in the Paine garage were also found on the package.

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/jfkinfo/wcr4.htm#p11

5.

Oswald's story was bogus:



http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/jfkinfo/wcr4.htm#p9


6.

So what? Oswald's whereabouts at 12.30 in the 6th floor window are the issue.

7.

Oswald's prints were found on the bag and fibers from the blanket in the Paine residence were also found on the bag.



These were the conclusions of the Warren Commission on this subject:

,

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/jfkinfo/wcr4.htm#p16

His latent palm print was found on the rifle barrel by Dallas PD Lieutenant Day in the crime lab.



A dead mam does not perspire and therefore there could not have been a latent print created after his death by shadowy conspirators.
If Day was part of a cover up then he MUST have known there was a conspiracy.
Why would conspirators needlessly involve a Dallas policeman? That just doesn't make sense.

8.

Wrong again.:D There is no debate on this issue.
You don't know much about forensics do you?
Grooves on bullets created by the lands of the spiral rifling in the barrels of guns can be match microscopically and are as unique as a fingerprint.
Fragments of a bullet were found on the front seat of the limousine and were matched to Oswald's rifle. The rifle grooves were found on the metal jacket.
The CE399 bullet was also similarly matched to Oswald's rifle.



http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/jfkinfo/app10.htm#p4


9.

Howard Brennan saw Oswald fire the shots at Kennedy from the 6th floor window. This is his sworn affidavit:
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/brennan1.htm
And this is his testimony:
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/brennan.htm
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/brennan2.htm
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/brennan3.htm

This is a list of the other witnesses with links to their testimony to Warren Commission:
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/wit.htm#a

This essay is the result of an exhaustive study of each and every assassination witness analysing how many shots they heard and where the believed the shots came from.

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/shots.htm

76.7% heard 3 shots.
53.8% believe the shots came from the TSBD.
33.7% believe the shots came from the grassy knoll.
BUT ONLY 4.8% believe the shots came from TWO directions.

You don't know much about CIA black ops assassination set ups do you? They've used variations on this one, as has the mafia, all through their long and sordid history. Do some reading on it. You'ld be surprised at how similar their plots can be, and how much they over did the framing of Oswald. They were clumsy but it didn't matter, as long as they succeeded in the assassination, because then LBJ would be president and in charge of everything including the cover-up with the great assistance of FBI director J. Edgar Hoover. There are compelling proofs of all of this out there if you would take the time to read some of them - but clearly you are not interested in doing so as you cling to the greatest pile of crap ever assembled by a Presidential Commission (a fixed one at that) - The Warren Commission Report.

symboybot

Di0genes wrote: »

He's one eye witness he's contradicted by the physical evidence.



Really where?

Ruby was tried and convicted.

Ruby's conviction was overturned and a new trial was ordered at a jurisdiction outside of Dallas. He died of a virulent form of lung cancer 28 days after being subjected to 15 minutes of continuous x-rays (which weakens one's immune system if not destroying it), and injected by a "doctor" unknown to Ruby or the prison system. Ruby claimed he had been injected with a bio-weapon fast acting cancer virus. Prior to the injection Ruby had a slow acting stomach cancer, but no lung cancer. Twenty-eight days later he died of lung cancer. You figure it out. Previously Ruby had asked Earl Warren and Gerald Ford to take him to Washington so he could tell the truth without fear for his life. They refused.

Tipsy McSwagger

It presents a compelling case for a combination of CIA, Military Intelligence, and mafia hit men (some US, and some French Corsican) run by rightwing elements of the CIA, financed by Texas big oilmen, and aided and abetted in at least the cover-up if not the planning and implementation by the FBI, J. Edgar Hoover, Lyndon Johnson and his allies and underlings.

Do you actually believe this? And nobody has ever talked in nearly 50 years. Also this team of hit men surely must be the worst in history if they could only hit the intended target in an open vehicle moving at a slow pace just two times.

Edit - you forgot to add the Dallas Police Department into the list of the conspirators.

fergus o brien

tipsy thats an often used tactic by LNs so say that multiple agencies /dpd etc were all in on some vast conspiracy which involves a cast of thousands . the conspiracy which culminated in the death of jfk and the subsequent cover up are two different things .

there is evidence of more than 3 shots being fired no matter if some of them missed the intended target ,that in its self would show atleast a conspiracy as it means there would need to be more than one shooter .

Tipsy McSwagger

So there was 2 conspiracies? One to kill JFK and one to cover it up.

The only sound argument for a conspiracy of any kind is to admit Oswald was one of the shooters. If you say he was just a 'patsy' then his actions before and after the assassination don't make any sense. Even a lot of conspiracy theorists have come to this conclusion.

- Oswald was recruited to kill JFK
- Oswald acted alone or part of a team
- Realised he was set up after the shooting
- Panicked, killed Officer Tippett
- Went to meeting place at the cinema
- Nobody there, cops close in on him
- Pulls out gun but apprehended
- Silenced by Jack Ruby

This is the only scenario that seems plausible to me. But then all these other things are added into the mix that over complicate things.

fergus o brien

you really need to read what people are posting carefully before you reply ,i will say it again there was a conspiracy to assassinate jfk and it was followed by a cover up but the two are not the same thing .

if only 3 shells were found and it can be shown that more than 3 shots were fired then by definition we have a conspiracy because oswald couldnt have fired more shots than the 3 attributed to him .

Tipsy McSwagger

3 shells found, 3 shots fired by LHO. Most of the witnesses claim they only heard 3 shots and they came from the direction of the book depository. This can be proven while all other theories can be dismissed pretty easily.